Uber-crewmen :)

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Uber-crewmen :)

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Uber-crewmen :)

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Uber-crewmen :) - 12/13/2000 1:15:00 PM

Joseph

Posts: 11
Joined: 11/14/2000
Status: offline

Hi. I just have a few concerns I'd like to share with everyone. Some of this has probably been talked about before, so I'm sorry for any overlap. And please keep in mind while reading through this that I do love the game.

I am just hoping for a few basic changes in the game. Anyway, here goes. About the title of the post... well, I have played a few scenarios where crewmen from a destroyed enemy tank assaulted and immobilized one of my tanks. How? They're armed with pistols! Did they jam them in between the track and drive sprocket? Even more importantly, there's no way the crew from a destroyed tank, probably reduced in number by one or two, would have the morale to assault an enemy vehicle. They'd be hiding in a ravine or forest (or running as fast as they could to the rear...or busy surrendering) and praying to God that they weren't spotted, much less running out, with pistols blazing, assaulting a Sherman. They also do not have the training for such things. See below.

The same crewmen will also regularly engage in gunnery duels with enemy infantry formations. Now the maximum range of a pistol is about... 150 yards? I would guess the actual effective range is more like 40-50 yards if you're a crack shot. The range of their weapons is extremely limited, and they would have very few rounds for them. They would definitely not be taking shots at enemy infantry unless the enemy was at extremely close range, and if the enemy did approach the much more likely outcome is that the crew would surrender. They wouldnt try taking on enemy infantry with pistols. That was the main concern I had when considering this post...the behavior of crew from abandoned vehicles. Please bear with me though, I have a couple extra comments. One is related to infantry formations. I shouldn't need to kill an infantry formation to nearly the last man in order for them to disperse. It was exceedingly rare for a unit to be functioning effectively at even 50% or 60% strength, much less 20 or 30%. It seems that the 10 man squads most commonly disperse when there are 2 or 3 guys left. What's more is that these severely reduced squads will be firing regularly and inflicting casualties from time to time. I can't help but find this hard to believe. One final point. I am in the middle of a campaign in North Africa... Mission is assault. I broke through the initial fortification and minefield barrier, and sent a few tanks and halftracks charging through the breach. There were a few enemy tanks that showed up during the computer's turn, and I naturally engaged them with my own tanks once it was my turn again. My percentages ranged from about 20-60, depending on the firing unit, and I had a platoon of tanks each with about 3 shots. All of my shots missed.... One of the computer's 16% shots hit my PzIIIJ command tank and knocked it out. Ok, all well and good. War is not a science. The thing is though... I had saved the game early in the previous turn. I was a bit upset about losing my dear command tank, so I cheated a bit and reloaded the game. I repeated what I described above... Same percentages for both sides, same outcome. I lose a tank, computer's forces are not even hit once. The same outcome happened 9 times, in fact. I reloaded it 9 times....because I wanted to see just how random things were. I get the feeling they aren't. There seems to be a bias against the human player that is an attempt to make up for the computer's lack of ability. I can understand why that is included, as it is difficult to program an AI routine. But PLEASE get rid of it. It is stupid and frustrating to deal with the computer cheating. Not to mention I beat the hell out of it anyway, despite its cheating.

But it is terribly frustrating when it happens over and over. Arrrgh. I know this sounds negative...I don't intend to sound like I hate the game. I certainly don't. But I would like to see a few changes. 1) Make the crewmen unable to assault vehicles 2) The crewmen should not be firing against enemy infantry at 200 yards plus. They should have a chance to fire at 0-1 hex distance, but make it so the more likely outcome is surrender when an enemy unit moves nearby. 3) Infantry squads should disband sooner...a lower percentage of casualties should result in dispersal. 4) GET RID OF THE COMPUTER'S CHEAT MODE!!!

ok, i'm done. any and all feedback is welcome. thanks for reading this far.

_____________________________

Post #: 1

- 12/13/2000 3:37:00 PM

Fredde

Posts: 498
Joined: 6/7/2000
From: Goteborg, Sweden
Status: offline

Just commenting on one of the issues. Casualties as represented by the game are not only dead and wounded men. It can also be shell-shocked men, men too scared to function properly�etc. You should probably see it more like that the squad disperse and stop working as a fighting unit when only a few men (depending on the initial strength of the squad) are effectively fighting back.

_____________________________

"If infantry is the Queen of the battlefield, artillery is her backbone", Jukka L. M�kel� about the Finnish victory at Ihantala.

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 2

- 12/13/2000 8:14:00 PM

Tommy

Posts: 232
Joined: 5/31/2000
From: In that brush, behind you; raising a PIAT to my sh
Status: offline

Joseph, The crewmen here are superhumans. I just had a game where four or five times, an inf squad would fire at a crewman and miss all shots. Then the crewman would fire pistols at the squad; kill 1 and put 6 suppression points on. Squad fires back - 0 hits. Crew fires back; 1 kill 6 more supp points. This just can't be right! On your random test - I also did that but I'm sure that I noticed about three different outcome sets. And each outcome set seemed to generate slightly different firefight outcomes each time it ran. An outcome set is a unique order of actions by the various squads involved. ie, set 1 - the AI halftrack always approaches first, fires and usually misses. Although on some replays, it hits. set 2 - the AI tank moves up first, then the halftrack comes by and fires. There does seem to be a randomness, not cheating here. Remember, you can adjust AI advantage. This gives the odds a slight lean in favor of the AI so it "appears" to give a better fight. Tommy

_____________________________

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 3

- 12/13/2000 11:00:00 PM

Gurney Halleck

Posts: 15
Joined: 12/7/2000
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

Hello Joseph, I have never suspected the AI of cheating, I get what seems to be random results even when I have had to reload. I suspect that your save game has stuck you with the same random number seed. That when you you saved the game you also saved the seed, so no matter how many times you load that save you are very likely to get same results. I dont know how the random number seeds are generated for this game, but if you really want to change the results of your battle you can try loading the turn and doing things in a different order or just try moving all the inf. around and shooting at empty hexes ect... in the attempt to generate another seed or modify the one you have and then firing your armor.

And who better would know how to easily immobilize a tank then another tank crew. Gurney Halleck ------------------ "You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous is never get involved in a land war in asia" [This message has been edited by Gurney Halleck (edited December 13, 2000).]

_____________________________

"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous is never get involved in a land war in asia"

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 4

- 12/14/2000 12:59:00 AM

Windo von Paene

Posts: 174
Joined: 5/16/2000
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

I agree with the crews vs. Infantry issue. The "Small Arms" fire from crews seems to be way too effective.

_____________________________

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 5

- 12/14/2000 1:26:00 AM

Kluckenbill

Posts: 278
Joined: 6/7/2000
From: Lancaster, PA, USA
Status: offline

Me too! I have experienced all the things you guys have mentioned. I don't want to lower overall AI effectiveness, just the crews. I just started Watchword Freedom and I have had several SS Rifle Squads decimated by those damn T34 crews! ------------------ Target, Cease Fire !

_____________________________

Target, Cease Fire !

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 6

- 12/14/2000 1:34:00 AM

Warhorse

Posts: 5712
Joined: 5/12/2000
From: Birdsboro, PA, USA
Status: offline

I think awhile back, someone had wanted smg's with the Soviet crews, this is exactly why they shouldn't have them!! Same goes for snipers, and ATR squads with grenades. I have taken all this away from them, little ridiculous to have a sniper, walk up to a tank, of all things, an KO it no problem!! There is probably some freakish thing internally with the crews, and other small units like that, they seem to be more lethal, taking away sai armament does help alot though!! Hope this helps! ------------------ Mike Amos Meine Ehre Heisst Treue

_____________________________

Mike Amos

Meine Ehre hei�t Treue
www.cslegion.com

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 7

- 12/14/2000 3:33:00 AM

Joseph

Posts: 11
Joined: 11/14/2000
Status: offline

Thanks for the responses guys.

There seems to be some common agreement about the crews' effectiveness against tanks and infantry. Perhaps in the next revision someone could go in and add in a new modifier for the crews of abandoned vehicles, AT guns, etc. Taken in context of the whole game, it is a minor issue, but at the same time it would be nice to see this fixed.

_____________________________

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 8

- 12/14/2000 4:42:00 AM

Rhone

Posts: 114
Joined: 8/17/2000
Status: offline

I'm sure there are some 'tanker' lovers out there that would argue that they could kick any infantry butt they wanted!

But I agree, if one minute a guy is driving a tank (he probably just learned how to drive a day ago) and the next he is just been flipped over by an 88 shell...he probably isn't out hunting down Panthers with his Colt .45!

_____________________________

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 9

- 12/14/2000 4:48:00 AM

john g

Posts: 984
Joined: 10/6/2000
From: college station, tx usa
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Joseph: Thanks for the responses guys. There seems to be some common agreement about the crews' effectiveness against tanks and infantry. Perhaps in the next revision someone could go in and add in a new modifier for the crews of abandoned vehicles, AT guns, etc. Taken in context of the whole game, it is a minor issue, but at the same time it would be nice to see this fixed.

I never noticed the crew from enemy vehicles taking out my vehicles, but then I don't approach closer than 3 hexes to any good order enemy inf class unit. I machine gun them down before they have a chance to get back into an abandoned vehicle or back into covering terrain. Also regarding the firing, when you fire a tank the percentage shown was supposed to be the very best you could expect, if and I repeat if shows 60% you may have a total of -59% percent modifiers and have the default 1% chance to hit (you always have at least 1% no matter how bad the shot). Most crew now have misc inf weapons which at close range is better than a bolt rifle or pistol (shotguns and carbines?). Stand off at range 12 and pick them off with machine guns and snipers, don't move in to their killing range. When I play I don't look at percentage chance to hit, if the shot is necessary, I shoot, if I don't need to take the shot, I won't. I do also play with weapons breakdown active all the time, so limiting your shots to when you need to, will keep you from breaking your guns earlier. thanks, John.

_____________________________

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 10

- 12/14/2000 5:43:00 AM

Dave_R

Posts: 84
Joined: 9/22/2000
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Rhone: I'm sure there are some 'tanker' lovers out there that would argue that they could kick any infantry butt they wanted! But I agree, if one minute a guy is driving a tank (he probably just learned how to drive a day ago) and the next he is just been flipped over by an 88 shell...he probably isn't out hunting down Panthers with his Colt .45!

Actually I'm both an ex tanker, and a tank lover. But I do have to agree with the rest of this thread. The superstrong crewmen do pig me off a hell of a lot. It's the one bad aspect of the game for me. I can live with the odd crew fighting back when their backs are against the wall so to speak, but time and time again is getting silly! Wow! First time I've felt the need to whine about something! (grins)

_____________________________

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 11

- 12/14/2000 5:58:00 AM

BA Evans

Posts: 250
Joined: 5/25/2000
From: USA
Status: offline

I always keep plenty of infantry around my tanks. The infantry spots crewmen or Bazooka squads for my tanks. Never had a problem with enemy crew killing my tanks. I guess I just don't put my tanks into those situations. BA Evans

_____________________________

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 12

- 12/14/2000 6:20:00 AM

kao16

Posts: 311
Joined: 4/10/2000
From: Christchurch, New Zealand
Status: offline

I just had a look at what a misc small arms does: Range 24 (4 hexes) Acc: 8 Warhead: 1 HE Kill: 2 A colt .45 is Range: 4 (1 hex) acc: 4 Warhead: 1 HE Kill: 1 So, the US Army FO crew is better having abandoned their jeep (Misc Small Arms) than when firing its .45 from the jeep. Perhaps what is needed is a special "Crew misc small arms" entry - to take account of the fact that experienced tankers tended to actually carry more than just the issue pistol for self defence but with a range of 1 or 2 hexes (4-8). [This message has been edited by kao16 (edited December 13, 2000).]

_____________________________

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 13

- 12/14/2000 6:54:00 AM

Major Destruction

Posts: 881
Joined: 8/10/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline

I think this was what was intended. The crews were supposed to be armed with a variety of weapons such as smg's, pistols and any other weapon they 'picked up' by chance. I would agree that an HE kill of 2 is higher than it needs to be, and that the range of 24 (6 hexes) is also excessive. However they are really only accurate at 2 hexes, so stay clear of those riled tankers and machine gun them like you're supposed to!

_____________________________

They struggled with a ferocity that was to be expected of brave men fighting with forlorn hope against an enemy who had the advantage of position......knowing that courage was the one thing that would save them.

Julius Caesar, 57 BC

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 14

- 12/14/2000 10:04:00 AM

Joseph

Posts: 11
Joined: 11/14/2000
Status: offline

Well one particular instance got me a bit annoyed concerning the crewmen assaulting armored vehicles..which they couldn't do anyway

they only have pistols, maybe at most one carbine on the whole tank, for god's sake. Unless they jump onto the hull and fire through the vision slot to kill the driver...they're not gonna do much. I mentioned earlier too the morale factor. There's just no way they would even think about assaulting an enemy vehicle. Anyway...This one instance saw my tank move adjacent to a crewmen unit that had been undetected. Boom, my tank is immobilized. Uhm... no way.

That just wouldn't happen. Other's have brought up the point that one should shoot up the crewmen. This shouldn't be the case though. The crewmen would not have any fight left in them in a normal situation. They'd be running for the rear or surrendering to the advancing enemy, not waging suicidal battles armed with pistols and possibly a carbine. Wasting shots on them when there are other targets is not a good thing

Oh well. I can understand everyones' point. In a way it's strangely satisfying to see a couple brave crews putting up a fight against hopeless odds.

But I do strongly feel it's not realistic. ok, I've posted a lot of stuff. I'll be quiet for a while now.

_____________________________

(in reply to Joseph)

Post #: 15

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Uber-crewmen :)

Page: [1]

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

1.844

Slitherine

Uber-crewmen :)